Personally, and hopefully, I think that on an IN/OUT referendum the result would be rather similar to the last one where all the big furore was made by activists for change, and the silent majority carried the day.Perhaps SJ, or even NB, if you have an opinion outside Independence, you see things differently?

I have no idea Jim.

But . . . opinion polls seem to consistently show an appetite South of the border for leaving the EU.

I was speaking to a guy yesterday who moved from a Norfolk/London life to the Borders 15 or so years ago. A now retired school headmaster. We got to talking about the last referendum and the upcoming (if Tories win the General Election) EU referendum. As you do...

He asserted that the UKIP vote is a barely disguised racism and xenophobia, a total intolerance of any colour or ethnicity that is not “British”. Most people who are being coerced into voting UKIP have absolutely no understanding of the financial, legal and social ramifications of the UK leaving the EU; on the UK or the wider EU. They also do not understand that the bulk of the people they see as foreigners and scroungers are here legally (and are working) from parts of the commonwealth, the former Empire and many have been for several generations now. Leaving the EU will not change their residency status. In fact, if we are ostracized from the EU trading block, we will need to encourage closer ties with them.

Where Scotland was prepared to similarly break from the UK and (through the process) break with the EU. It had the full intention of renewing all the trade commitment by rejoining the EU in the most immediate timeframe. If the UK leaves the EU there are no plans in place, no timetable for treatise, no idea what will replace the 1000s of broken pieces of legislation that the EU has signed between states over the last 42 years and no comprehension of what will happen to the 10,000s of contracts signed between businesses, manufacturing contracts, legal alignments, flow of city commerce and EU/UK wide trade - of us going from a free trade market place of 500 million to one of 60 million.

I'd love to hear from someone who can tell me what the positive things will be about leaving the EU.

It is strange how some people buy in to the vision of a great British bygone utopian era - before or during the war that few are alive now to have actually experienced first hand.

The reality for the average family, life long poverty, poor health, no health care, high childhood mortality, rickets and scurvy from smog and poor diet, injury or death in lawless factories and pits, insanitary slum housing, low life expectancy, little chance of progression to a better life. The halcyon days between the wars were purely for the upper/ruling classes.

And blame the EU for everything that befalls them in their life (mostly imaginary) and ignore the benefits.

The improvement to health and the environment built through peace brought about by the formation of the EU and the wealth that has created. Alignment of far reaching health and safety legislation across the EU - By agreement at all times by all the signatories - we were forced in to nothing - improved environmental protection by meeting standards already set in neighbouring EU countries (we've been playing catch up for years) is really staring to make a difference. Many species are coming back from the brink.

The thing on the news about the £1.6 billion realignment for payments - what a total croc - it is smoke and mirrors - the UK has known about this for months, it should be no surprise. This realignment to balance the £billions the UK receives in EU rebate every year. The UK is a multi £trillion economy. That amount is a pittance compared to what we earn from EU membership in trade.

It is 1/6th of an Olympics. 1/10th of a Crossrail, 1/3 of a supercarrier (so far). The monthly trade between the UK and EU is (eg for June 2014), exports of goods were £23.5 billion - imports of goods were £32.9 billion these fluctuate across the year due to changes in oil prices, tourism, changes to manufacturing cycles etc. But you can see a £1.6 billion bill is a piss in a pond ere and is being spun by the Tories to make them look like the anti EU force majeure to beat UKIP.

It's a real pity so few can see through the politics to view our World/Europe as it is, and not through the blinkers and tinted spec. view (rosy or otherwise) pushed by the various self-interested political parties, who's true aim is either filling their own pockets or simply gaining/clinging onto power.

Well, there we are then.While it is comforting to know that all the posters on this thread are broadly in favour of the EU, this debate will get nowhere unless a dissenting voice appears. Where are all the UKIP supporters - who appear to be on a roll in the Home Counties?But maybe it will revive if it comes to the bit, and we do have a referendum on the subject.But please, whoever calls it. make it a bit less than 2+ years to the polling day.

SJYou aver that the campaign for exiting the EU has already started - -but these type of campaigns start once a decision is made, by dissenters who do not like or accept the majority verdict. This has been evident since the original opt -in and even more recently with the long running Independence referendum. No matter what course of action is decided on by our legislators, either by internal voting, or in extreme cases by a referendum, there will always be those who do not accept the result, and will continually beavering away to try and reverse it.Personally, I considered the "Poll Tax" to be a far fairer way of paying for local services by asking everyone who used the services, and who could afford to do so, to contribute to paying for them. But unfortunately there was a huge section of the population, previously exempt, who were now being asked to put their hands into their pockets and actually contribute. and regrettably, the government caved in, and rescinded it, and I accepted this climb down and have done nothing further to revive it.I will say this in favour of the SNP - they did try to introduce a "Local Income Tax" which would have been just as fair as the "Poll Tax", but unfortunately for some reason it was booted out (perhaps NB, you could fill us in on the details of the machinations behind this failure, and who the culprits were who scuppered it).I realise that there may be a certain drift in the ongoing debate here, but would welcome any input from those who either agree or disagree with any or all of these remarks. Finally to SJ - I was very surprised that G. Osborne was even appointed after the election as Chancellor, as Vince Cable seemed to have a firmer grasp of things financially, and I suspect that it was the "old School Tie" connection that got him the job. Since appointment he never appears to be represented at EU or international conventions, but on our tv at least, spends his time visiting factories (which are doing well) and wearing a hard hat.

I will say this in favour of the SNP - they did try to introduce a "Local Income Tax" which would have been just as fair as the "Poll Tax", but unfortunately for some reason it was booted out (perhaps NB, you could fill us in on the details of the machinations behind this failure, and who the culprits were who scuppered it).

In 2007 the SNP were elected on a manifesto which included a proposal to replace council tax with local income tax. They initially proposed 3p in the pound, but after the 2008 financial debacle and ensuing recession it appeared that this figure cold be up to 50% higher.

The 2007-2011 SNP administration was of course a minority government, so this and the implacable opposition of Labour to a local income tax combined to 'scupper' the proposal.

NBI am indebted to you for your information on the demise of the "Local Income Tax" as proposed by the SNP. Two points arise out of this, and in no way I am casting aspersions on the SNP.Firstly, SNP, although in minority at the time would have managed to outvote Labour, if all the others had rallied to their cause, but they did not - who were the backsliders who ganged up with Labour to oppose it?Secondly - when the SNP managed to get their majority in 20? , why did they not re-introduce the bill with the assurance that they could not be defeated?Although the Labour party are left of centre, and would look unkindly on any proposal that would inconvenience their members (in their pockets) as Local Income Tax was bound to do, I find it surprising that the SNP (which relies on it's left of centre support) unless they are fearlessly interested in social justice, regardless of their rank and file, were even contemplating this radical step to make accountability fairer to our population.Over to you NB (or any of your cohorts) - why did they cave in like Margaret Thatcher, and abandon the pursuit of social justice?

The idea was ditched because it would have cost the Scottish government £500m in subsidies to the 32 Scottish councils, and also would have seen a £2 billion cut to Scotland’s block grant, by implementation of the Barnett formula.

A big thank you to PC for his explanation of the reason that the SNP abandoned their Local Income Tax plan. If correct, this does suggest that it didn't proceed because of financial restraints, rather than opposition from other parties.However it does suggest that whoever was in charge of finances within the SNP at that time was rather deficient in the time he spent on his homework, and had not fully researched the ramifications of the proposal. While not wishing to rake over old coals, could I suggest that several options suggested by BOTH sides in the recent referendum, would not have seen fruition, after the result, because someone somewhere was not too good at his sums.The jury is out, on the majority concessions, but given the chicanery of most politicians (especial those who weasel their way to the top), 100% approval of the promises offered would probably be a first in UK politics.

I'm not sure whether this should be posted here or under 'I'm disappointed in Seil' given Bill's Saltire vandalism but I had an interesting greeting this morning as I returned to Seil from my school run!

From a 'local' and a 'no thanks' supporter, known to many of us, I received a quite remarkable and unmistakeable Nazi salute - difficult in a car, but, performed very well!

Judging by the facial expression it was heartfelt! You'd have thought he'd lost the referendum!

In no way, can one condone shows of aggression by anyone, purely because of beliefs held by others.However , I will have to be careful with my motoring acknowledgement for the courtesy shown by others on our single track sections, in case they are misinterpreted.It is an unfortunate fact of life that if one is too blatant in espousing a cause, one runs the risk of alienating some members of the public who are not as well behaved and courteous as the rest of us.Unfortunately DC's clues as to his antagonist are a bit vague in pinpointing him (presumably a him), so we will have to remain in ignorance of the perpetrator.

The appearance of a new avatar for DC "Old pointy ears" seems to be in limbo at the moment - does he feel denuded without something visible in that left handed space ? and thus inhibited from producing any remarks on the subject?Secondly, I do not know who is responsible for the saltire near the under used notice board at the shop, but it is in a very bedraggled state flying virtually at half mast. One wag I spoke to about the current situation of the flag suggested that it was a reflection of the referendum result, as far as the original flag raisers were concerned. This is just a suggestion to whoever is responsible - either restore it to it's former glory, until the winter gales completely decimate it, or take it down and preserve it until such time as a further referendum is called (mothballs might be useful here).These remarks I put forward purely to satisfy the numerous readers of this thread, who have been denied any interesting input for over a week, and who might just be tempted to shoot me down in flames or (possibly a forlorn hope) add something interesting and relevant to the proceedings .

Admittedly, flags lend a bit of colour and interest to the landscape, and there are one or two hereabouts who keep one on display permanently ( they - the flags - must be made of sterner stuff than those on the golf course ), but flag waving of any sort is indicative of making a statement about the allegiance of the waver. Fine, at a rally when all about you are displaying the same allegiance, and a great feeling of solidarity, and invulnernability.Maybe I am too ingrained in Scottish culture, but I feel that there are some things in life which are of a personal nature and can be shared with nearest and dearest, but a public declaration of ones personal beliefs in everything from religious/sexual/political/moral/anything controversial beliefs lays one open to attack/abuse/condemnation -or alternatively in some cases approbation. But whatever the outcome of the declaration it will alienate some and enthuse others - so sticking your colours to the mast can be counter productive in a relationship with the wider community - unless it is intended to establish a "them and us" division, which is probably the basis of every dispute/confrontation/war that homo sapiens has inflicted upon itself since the extinction of the dinosaurs.I realise that any humanitarian progress would not be possible were it not for those willing to stick their head above the parapet for change, so there must be a line between what is for the benefit of humanity as a whole, and what is purely for sectional interest. and advancement.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum